Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of the International Normalized Ratio Between a Point-of-Care Test and a Conventional Laboratory Test: the Latter Performs Better in Assessing Warfarin-induced Changes in Coagulation Factors.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care testing (POCT) coagulometers are increasingly used for monitoring warfarin therapy. However, in high international normalized ratio (INR) ranges, significant discrepancy in the INR between POCT and conventional laboratory tests occurs. We compared the INR of POCT (CoaguChek XS Plus; Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) with that of a conventional laboratory test (ACL TOP 750; Instrumentation Laboratory SpA, Milan, Italy) and explored possible reasons for discrepancy.

METHODS: Paired POCT and conventional laboratory test INRs were analyzed in 400 samples from 126 patients undergoing warfarin therapy after cardiac surgery. Coagulation factor and thrombin generation tests were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Correlations between coagulation factors and INRs were determined using Pearson correlation coefficients.

RESULTS: The mean difference in the INR between the tests increased at high INR ranges. Endogenous thrombin potential levels were decreased at INR <2.0 for CoaguChek XS Plus and 2.0< INR <3.0 for ACL TOP 750 compared with those at INR <2.0 for both tests, indicating a better performance of ACL TOP 750 in assessing thrombin changes. The correlation coefficients of coagulation factors were stronger for ACL TOP 750 INR than for CoaguChek XS Plus INR. Vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors were found to contribute to the INR discrepancy.

CONCLUSIONS: Decreases in vitamin K-dependent coagulation and anticoagulation factors can explain the significant discrepancy between the two tests in high INR ranges. Since conventional laboratory test INR values are more reliable than POCT INR values, a confirmatory conventional laboratory test is required for high INR ranges.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app